Baggers hate the EPA and love pollution

On 2011-04-02, Nunya Bidnits wrote:

What's particularly troubling about this legislative nightmare is the
almost complete lack of news over it. Huffington is jes about the
only mainstream news media that even mentioned it. Other than agribiz
and environmental special interest websites, its passage is almost non-existent
in the mainstream online press.

Used to be the fourth estate took pride in being the watchdog over our
govt. Now it appears to have degenerated into our govt's lap dog. :(

nb
 
"notbob" ha scritto nel messaggio


Used to be the people took more interest in the safety and quality of their
lives, too. I can remember being part of a tenants' rights group in the
Seventies, not because landlords told us that they werte all going to do
some things that would leave many homeless, but because those who found it
out gathered up supporters and we went into the streets and got the new laws
rescinded.

People seem to want to leave everything up to someone else now. US news
sources are desperately bad and have been for almost 10 years... maybe
longer, but I didn't have so many other sources before then.

Instead of letting PACs and Tea Partiers have all the power, maybe ordinary
people should grab the reins and start forcing government and news orgs to
pay attention. Even a one day boycott of all news sources would have a
terrible effect. One day a month would be telling. Once a week would put
some of them on the brink. They need you more than you need them.
 
"Bryan" wrote

So you traded one bias for another.


I saw good news recently:

Maybe. Did they recover their development costs? If so, the price is very
high. If not, where does the money come from to develop the drug?

"The suburban St. Louis-based KV Pharmaceutical had earlier defended its
pricing, saying the company is spending a quarter of a billion dollars on
the drug's development, including $60 million in research."
 
On Apr 3, 8:43?am, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:

Those sources are relatively unbiased. I heard Senator Coburn
interviewed a few days ago. The Diane Rehm show features as many
panelists from the Heritage Fdn or American Enterprise Inst as those
from Brookings or The Nation. I do not listen to Pacifica or MS-NBC.

They didn't "develop" the drug. It has been in continuous use for the
same purpose for decades.

--Bryan
 
In article ,
"Ed Pawlowski" wrote:


It's been out for 50 years. Before this, you went to a pharmacy and
they made it up for you. This company was just going to mix it up in
big batches and sell it premade. The stuff made to order was ten to
twenty bucks a dose. This company was going to sell it for US$1500 a
dose!


Since the drug has been available for 50 years, they shouldn't have to
go through the entire process that new drugs that haven't been used
before need. I wonder how much of that "$60 million in research" is
marketing research, and how much of that quarter billion is advertising
and promotion.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
[email protected]
 
In article , [email protected] says...

The crazy part of this is that apparantly a compounding pharmacy can
make up a dose for 20 bucks.

Either there's some part of this story that the press has garbled or the
guy who came up with this particular business plan needs to spend some
time in the booby hatch.
 
"Dan Abel" wrote

Intresting. If it has been around so long, it seems it would be used often
at $20 a shot. I'm not familiar with it aside from the one article about
development costs. Something strange going on.
 
In article ,
"Ed Pawlowski" wrote:



You should probably read the article yourself, from above without the
line breaks:

http://www.stltoday.com/news/science/article_1f79afea-0d48-57d0-88da-2496
1efdf306.html

"The drug is a synthetic form of the hormone progesterone. It came on
the market more than 50 years ago to treat other problems and was
withdrawn in the 1990s, though not for safety reasons.

But the drug got a new life in 2003, with publication of a study that
reported it helped prevent early births to women who had a history of
giving birth prematurely. Obstetricians began prescribing the drug for
more women, but it was only available through "compounding" pharmacies.

Initially, doctors were glad to hear that KV Pharmaceutical was
licensing the drug. It meant it would be manufactured in an
FDA-regulated facility, with tighter controls and follow-up testing to
ensure quality and consistency from dose to dose."

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
[email protected]
 
Back
Top